Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

HB957 - ATF response on TX made Suppressors

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by Hoggslayer View Post
    So that goes for the sale of Suppressors. What about the guy making one in Texas and it staying in Texas. Sounds like the new Texas law might help a guy like that out.
    NFA items are regulated on the federal level. Not the state level.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Briar Friar View Post
      Booooooo….

      Mass noncompliance.
      Yep.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by muzzlebrake View Post
        Is it time for Texas to become a sovereign nation again?
        Yes.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by trophy8 View Post
          NFA items are regulated on the federal level. Not the state level.
          So is marijuana.

          Comment


            #20
            If you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist. What are the chances you'll be asked for papers? If it looks legit, no one will question it. Now, if you have a coke bottle or oil filter duct taped to the end, then yeah, all bets are off.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by adam_p View Post
              So is marijuana.
              Agreed. I’m not saying I support it. I want the entire NFA branch abolished and want to buy MGs and stuff like normal guns. And suppressors like they were a rifle stock.

              Just stating the facts. And someone is gonna get in bad trouble over this if they try to push the issue.

              Build your own. Keep it to yourself. Y’all act like that hasn’t gone on forever anyway LOL.

              Mine are all legal and registered for the record

              Comment


                #22
                How many have been checked out and by who when they had a legal suppressor (or any other NFA item)?

                Mine are registered BTW, no plans to go to jail over a suppressor but think they should be able to be bought as easily as a firearm

                I know of one person that got nailed for having an oil filter adapter thing. Don't know what he did to get caught (maybe talked about it online or bought it from a sting operation?) but he brought all his problems on himself.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Who wants to be the first one to try it?

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Texas Grown View Post
                    So, then how do states get away with selling narcotics? Aren't they controlled by the ATF also as illegal by Federal definitions? And are other states collecting tax on it from businesses or individuals? Seems two-faced to me.
                    I said this about half a dozen times when it was being debated in earlier threads.

                    So I will do it again gladly.

                    The word “state” as a noun originally meant country. It’s still pretty much l mean that today. The head of state of Israel is the Prime Minister, head of state of Germany is the president and so on.

                    The colonies when they went to war against Great Britain were completely autonomous and banded together in an alliance as allies, not as a completely independent nation composed of colonies. To a lot of extent it was no different than the allies in World War II where countries came together to fight a common enemy. Early in the movie The Patriot, South Carolina delegates were debating whether to levy a tax in support of the Continental Army. At one point a colonel in the Army said that eight of the 13 colonies have levied a tax to support the soon to be made, Declaration of Independence. One of the delegates stood up and said, Massachusetts and Virginia might be at war with England but South Carolina is not. While the movie is fiction-based on the actual events, this part of the movie is pretty much on target. Even the Articles of Confederation which came not long afterwards, it was clear that the colonies were to be autonomous and sovereign. Thirteen years after we declared independence, the United States Constitution went into effect which scrapped the Articles.

                    Why is it important? I guess it really isn’t unless you just want the history of it but it tells where we are today. We are in effect, 50 independent countries under one central government for the common good, defense, etc. We could just as well have been called, the United Countries of America. This is all laid out in the Preamble to the Constitution. The effect of it is the people in any state are under two different country’s laws. In Texas we are under the laws of the country of Texas and other laws of the United States. The point of that is that Texas does not need consent of the United States in order to pass most laws. Texas has the authority to say what requirements doctors must have to be licensed, what are traffic laws, how much are taxes and what will they pay for, etc. So the country of Texas can pass drug laws on what is illegal. The United States government, also being autonomous and a sovereign nation, can pass its laws. It is called dual sovereignty. Unless otherwise specifically put into federal law or the Constitution, the country of the United States has a right to make and enforce laws which it sees fit and the country of Texas has the same authority. Generally speaking Texas does not need US permission to pass laws and the US government does not need Texas permission. With that, each can choose which laws it will prosecute.

                    This also comes into play in the constitutional guarantee against double Jeopardy. The country of Texas can charge you with a crime as can the country of the United States and even if it is the same crime with the same set a facts, as long as the elements are the same you can be convicted twice of the same crime. You can also be found not guilty under one set of laws and then found guilty on the other set of laws even though it’s the same crime at the same location. It is not double Jeopardy. The only requirement is that either the state or the federal government has the elements of that crime listed in their laws. If you want an example, look at the Rodney King incident from California. Some officers were charged under state law of beating up Rodney King. They were found not guilty by a jury. So it was over right? Doesn’t the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution guarantee that? No. California can try them one time under their state law. The federal government has the same authority. So after they were found not guilty, causing the Los Angeles riots, the federal government indicted and then convicted two of the officers of the same crime which they had just been found not guilty.

                    So yes most drugs are illegal under state law that are also illegal under federal law. The federal government does not prosecute most crimes however. They leave an overwhelming majority of that to the states. If a local cop arrest somebody for marijuana, yes the federal government could charge that person. Why would they want to? For every federal agent there are probably 100 local county and state police. Why would the DEA want to be tied up with a misdemeanor marijuana arrest in San Antonio when there are probably thousands oh state licensed police officers in that county?

                    So then it comes down to, what does the federal government wish to spend their time and money on? Yes they can prosecute people coming out of a store in Colorado with a half an ounce of marijuana. They simply choose to ignore it. They do not have enough resources to start arresting thousands of people in Colorado.

                    But…… that same federal government has laws against NFA firearms and accessories. Just like with marijuana in some states, do you really think the federal government will simply ignore NFA items such as machine guns, suppressors, short barrel rifle‘s, etc.? In particular what about the current administration) They are doing everything they can to take guns away from law abiding citizens. While it is easy to ignore the guy smoking a joint in Colorado or even in Texas, do you think the Biden administration will simply allow a state like Texas to ignore the federal firearms law? Not only that, it is a federal tax law.

                    Or if you don’t want to read all of that, I could have reduced it to this…..

                    The federal government has the authority to make arrests for marijuana but they simply choose not to out of resources. They could ignore federal tax and NFA laws if they wished but I do not think that will happen. They have discretion to choose which laws they will enforce and I think they will aggressively enforce firearms laws at this moment in time.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by tvc184 View Post

                      The federal government has the authority to make arrests for marijuana but they simply choose not to out of resources. They could ignore federal tax and NFA laws if they wished but I do not think that will happen. They have discretion to choose which laws they will enforce and I think they will aggressively enforce firearms laws at this moment in time.
                      Agree and let's not overlook the IRS. These bastages will go after the tiniest of infractions. They are not going to roll over and ignore that $200 tax. They will hunt you down to the ends of the earth and use the ATF as their hit men. BTW, IRS has over 75,000 employees. ATF only has 5100 employees. There are 80,000 plus people in these 2 alphabet agencies all looking to make a name for themselves and most of them are gun haters. You still want to roll the dice?

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by BTLowry View Post
                        How many have been checked out and by who when they had a legal suppressor (or any other NFA item)?

                        Mine are registered BTW, no plans to go to jail over a suppressor but think they should be able to be bought as easily as a firearm

                        I know of one person that got nailed for having an oil filter adapter thing. Don't know what he did to get caught (maybe talked about it online or bought it from a sting operation?) but he brought all his problems on himself.
                        I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          TVC, I totally agree with everything you wrote. And want to thank you for writing all that out for others here. And I did take Gov 101 many years ago . My beef is where the corporations are formed and opening store fronts for the gross sale of more than just a few ounces. Why don't the Feds go after those folk/businesses/corporations who are producing thousands of pounds for retailers of said drug? I do understand about limited resources as well. But you would think they would want the bigger fish rather than turn a blind check because it's a different industry.

                          The fish are biting, and there's hogs to be kill-t. Gotta go!

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by ultrastealth View Post
                            I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
                            I gotta think to myself why should they even care..... Just some hard nose wanting to be somebody i guess. If i was a range officer and people showed up with a suppressor i would be happy. Could care less if legal or not that is the person in possession of its problem.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by ultrastealth View Post
                              I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
                              I'd be tempted to tell them to pound sand, unless they're law enforcement with probable cause.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by ultrastealth View Post
                                I have been asked by range officers to see my stamps a couple of times. Not lately, but I have been asked in the past.
                                I didn't think you had to show proof to a range officer, only law enforcement. Is this not the case?

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X